I campaigned with Gay groups and in the media across the country
for the Kinsey-based finding that 'We are everywhere.' This slogan
became a National Gay Task Force leitmotif. And the issues derived from
the implications of the Kinsey data became key parts of the national
political, educational, and legislative programs during my years at New
York's Gay Activist Alliance and the National Gay Task Force.

After years of our educating those who inform the public and
make its laws, the concept that 10 percent of the population is gay has
become a generally accepted 'fact.' While some reminding always seems
necessary, the 10 percent figure is regularly utilized by scholars, by
the press, and in government statistics. As with so many pieces of
knowledge and myth, repeated telling made it so.

Bruce Voeller, "Some Uses and Abuses of the Kinsey
Scale."[1]

WARNING!
Some of the material described in this chapter is extremely offensive in nature.

Anti-Life Philosophy.

Homosexuality is just like the color of your skin; ten percent of all
people are born that way. Being gay is the same as being left-handed.
Therefore, those with a homosexual orientation should receive
comprehensive civil rights protection and their lifestyle should be
taught in all of our schools as a perfectly acceptable alternative to
heterosexuality.

Anyone who is intolerant enough to think of homosexuals as anything
other than good citizens (just like me) is a fascist and a homophobic
bigot.

Introduction.

It was a good day. I was really glad to be part of a lesbian
and gay contingent, because "choice" includes choice of
sexuality too. Abortion is about sex, not about life, but about sex and
about women being able to have sex without fear of getting pregnant, and
that leads to sexual experimentation, and that leads to women being able
to sleep with women and men and whoever they want to ...

Woman participant in the April 1989 "March for Death" in
Washington, D.C.[2]

The Purpose of the Myth.

Those activists battling "gay
rights" must recognize that homosexual activists do not do anything
in the public realm unless it serves the homosexual movement very well
indeed.

The most powerful weapon in the "gay rights" arsenal is the
victim status.

A close second is the allegation that sodomites are "born that
way." If it can be shown that homosexuality is a genetic trait,
then the sodomites have a legitimate claim to being protected as a
'minority class' under Federal and state civil rights laws.

This weapon has been very effective indeed at convincing those in
power that homosexuals should indeed be a protected class.

"Born That Way?"

The psychology behind the advancement of
the myth of inherent vs. acquired sexual orientation is
quite simple. If a person is born homosexual, then he can claim
that he has no choice in being created homosexual; in other words, he
was, as the sodomites so shrilly claim, "born that way."

This allegation fails to explain why homosexuals commonly use the
terms "alternative lifestyle" and "sexual
preference," which both imply that sexual perverts choose
their particular lifestyle. The terms "alternative lifestyle"
and "sexual preference," along with many others coined by the
homosexuals, are artificial, sloganistic constructs coined for public
consumption, rather like the abortionists' coveted "potential
life" and "pre-embryo."

After all, we never hear about amputees adopting an "alternative
leg style."

What Freud Said.

Sigmund Freud, the most famous
psychologist/psychiatrist of all time, precisely identified the critical
turning point in a homosexual person's life the point at which a natural
priority is subordinated to an unnatural urge;

Moreover, it is a
characteristic common to all the perversions that in them reproduction
as an aim is put aside. This is actually the criterion by which we judge
whether a sexual activity is perverse if it departs from reproduction in
its aims and pursues the attainment of gratification independently. You
will understand, therefore, that the gulf and turning-point in the
development of the sexual life lies at the point of its subordination to
the purposes of reproduction. Everything that occurs after this
conversion takes place, and everything which refuses to conform to it
and serves the pursuit of gratification alone, is called by the
unhonored title of perversion and as such is despised.[3]

The "Ten Percent" Studies.

Homosexuals desperately crave
public acceptance for their perversions, and they will stoop to almost
any deception in order to obtain it.

Perhaps the most effective tactic the sodomites use (after the victim
status) is to wrap their allegations in a veneer of science. Members of
the public automatically lend credence to any claim that originates with
a professional medical organization or a prestigious journal, and the
sodomites know this.

The four scientific events most used by homosexuals to support their
viewpoints are;

(1) The original 1948 Alfred Kinsey report entitled Sexual
Behavior in the Human Male, which was the first to claim that ten
percent of the population is homosexual;

(2) The removal of homosexuality as a sexual dysfunction by the
American Psychiatric Association in 1973;

This chapter examines these four studies in detail and exposes the
fatal flaws inherent in each.

Following this section on the four studies is a discussion of four
very important points regarding the reality of the homosexual
orientation;

 What homosexuals say about themselves;
 What the experts say about the genetic basis of a homosexual
orientation;
 The actual percentage of homosexuals in the general population;
and
 The addictive nature of the homosexual orientation.

The Dubious Origins of the Big Lie:
The "Ten Percent" Myth is Born.

The Legend.

One of the most persuasive arguments that homosexuals
have traditionally used to support their position is the assertion that
fully ten percent of the population is "gay."

Just as pro-abortionists label their organizations and publications
to reflect the myth of the "pro-choice majority" (i.e., the
National Abortion Rights Action League refers to its newsletter as
"The Voice of the Majority"), so do homosexuals attempt to
perpetrate their myth with names such as "The Ten Percent
Foundation," "Project Ten," and the "One in Ten
Club."

The original source of the 'ten percent' statistic is Alfred Kinsey,
the country's best-known sex researcher. His most famous 'finding' held
that ten percent of the male population is "more or less
exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16
and 55." Kinsey also claimed that four percent of all males are
exclusively homosexual throughout their entire lives.[4]

The Institute.

It is instructive indeed to examine the life and
methods of the world's foremost sex researcher, Alfred Kinsey, and the
research organization he founded, the "Kinsey Institute for
Research on Sex, Gender, and Reproduction." The methods used by
this man and his organization reveal much about how the sex researchers
and sex educators operate.

Every year, Kinsey's Institute swallows millions of tax dollars and
produces thick volumes of information that forms the basis for much of
our country's sex education 'industry.' However, the information and
'research' generated by Kinsey's institute is dubious at best, because
the Institute steadfastly refuses to reveal its sources and study
methods. This, in and of itself, is enough to render its research
utterly meaningless, because it cannot be checked by examination and
replication.

The prime directive of scientific research is that it is useless
without verification or replicability.

Kinsey was so fanatical about secrecy that he told his staff
photographer William Dellenback that he would destroy all his files and
risk imprisonment rather than let authorities see them.[4]

Kinsey's unbendable rules included having no journalists present when
he talked, and demanding that journalists submit any articles mentioning
him or his Institute to him for approval before publication, in order to
screen them for unfavorable remarks or implications.

All of this renders meaningless the Kinsey Institute slogan;
"All Kinsey Institute activities derive from the belief that social
policy and personal decisions about sex, gender, and reproduction should
be made on the basis of factual information rather than on ignorance.
The Kinsey Institute continues its commitment to providing such
information."[4]

In summary, the Kinsey Institute has received tens of millions of
dollars in tax money but allows no inquiries whatever into its research
methods. It is supposedly a library of information on sex, but it allows
nobody to peek into its files, not even for the purpose of scientific
verification.

The Most Important 'Finding.'

The single most important 'finding'
that Kinsey produced was unquestioningly his assertion that ten percent
of the population is homosexual. This percentage is not only the basis
of the homosexual-rights "ten percent" myth, but also serves
as a cornerstone of the sex education classes being taught in the United
States today.

Kinsey's conclusions on sexuality were contained in the famous
studies he co-authored with Wardell B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, and P.H.
Gebhard. These were entitled Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, published by the W.B.
Saunders Company of Philadelphia in 1948 and 1953 respectively.

Kinsey's Flawed Research.

Kinsey's research represents a classic
example of looking for data to support a preordained set of desirable
conclusions.

Gershon Legman, the original compiler for Kinsey's pornography
collection, revealed that

Kinsey's not-very-secret intention was
to "respectabilize" homosexuality and certain sexual
perversions ... He did not hesitate to extrapolate his utterly
inadequate and inconclusive samplings to the whole population of the
United States, not to say the world ... This is pure propaganda, and is
ridiculously far from the mathematical or statistical science
pretended.[5]

Sexual statistics were not the only areas in which Kinsey 'fudged'
the truth. He often engaged in outright propaganda to slander those he
considered to be the most dangerous enemies of his sexual agenda. For
example, he would often claim that The Vatican possessed the world's
largest collection of pornography, a tactic commonly used by
anti-Catholic pro-abortion bigots. He continued to spread this lie even
after it was disproved.[4]

After his desired conclusions were drawn, all Kinsey had to do was
insure that the study process supported them, regardless of what data
was gathered and analyzed.

The best way to do this, of course, was to hire biased researchers.
All applicants to the Kinsey Institute who believed that homosexuality
was wrong were rejected.

After his conclusions were drawn and his biased researchers were
hired, all Kinsey had to do to guarantee 'successful' results was to
study a population that had a very high percentage of homosexuals
compared to the general population.

Kinsey's Male Report was based upon the detailed analysis of
the backgrounds and sexual practices of more than 5,000 men. These men
came from three classes that would inevitably guarantee a very high
percentage of homosexuality: Convicted sex criminals, male prostitutes,
and volunteers.

At least one-fourth of Kinsey's sample population were prison inmates
and convicted sex offenders, as compared to one percent of the general
population.[4,6] According to Male Report coauthor Wardell
Pomeroy, "We went to the [prison] records and got lists of the
inmates who were in for various kinds of sex offenses."[7] 44
percent of all of the prisoners in the Kinsey male sample had had
homosexual experience in prison, according to John Gagnon, a Kinsey
researcher.[6] Kinsey himself concluded that members of the prison
population were more than four times more likely to be homosexuals than
the normal population.[8]

Since the actual percentage of homosexuals in the general population
is from one to two percent, this factor alone was enough to
guarantee that Kinsey would get his "ten percent" figure.

According to page 216 of the Male Report, Kinsey's second
sample population consisted of "... several hundred male
prostitutes [who] contributed their histories." Male prostitutes
are by definition homosexual. So if we assume that 300 male
prostitutes were interviewed for the Kinsey study, this factor alone
would add a (300/5,000) = 6 percent rate of homosexuality to the final
conclusion.

But Kinsey was not satisfied with skewing his results just two ways.
Most of the reminder of his sample population consisted of volunteers,
many of whom were actively seeking Kinsey's advice on sexual
dysfunctions.[6]

This method automatically insured that he would include a heavy
"volunteer bias" in his study. This well-known statistical
principle proves that volunteers for any type of study in any field will
invariably skew the study results, because they are always
unrepresentative of the general population. A random sampling is always
more accurate.

Even after leading statistical researcher Abraham Maslow
experimentally demonstrated to Kinsey that a high percentage of
volunteers would skew his study, Kinsey ignored him. Statistician Quinn
McNemar of Stanford University confirmed this conclusion independently
of Maslow.

Even the use of three biased populations was not enough for Kinsey.
He wanted to make absolutely certain that his study results were
"satisfactory," so he deliberately asked his volunteers biased
questions. Page 53 of the Male Report admits that "We always
assume that everyone has engaged in every type of activity.
Consequently, we always begin by asking when they first engaged
in such activity" [emphasis in original].

Finally, the Truth. Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward W. Eichel
co-authored a book on Kinsey and the sex educators entitled Kinsey,
Sex, and Fraud. In this work, they characterize Kinsey's most famous
works, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior
in the Human Female as "... the most egregious example of
scientific deception in this century."[4]

Despite the shoddiness of the research that backed up Kinsey's
"studies," they have had a profound impact upon our society,
because the sex educators seized upon his tattered results much as the
population controllers pounced on Paul Ehrlich's ridiculous book The
Population Bomb.

Reisman and Eichel have concluded that the actual percentage of male
homosexuals in the United States is one to two percent. This figure is
strongly confirmed by the eight studies described in Figure 116-1, which
shows that only 3.0 percent of men and 3.5 percent of women have ever
had a homosexual experience in their entire lives. The percentage
of "full-time" homosexuals is about half of these figures
around 1.5 percent, or one-seventh the representation claimed by
militant sodomite groups.

FIGURE 116-1
RESULTS OF STUDIES AND SURVEYS ON THE PERCENTAGE OF THE PUBLIC THAT CLAIMS TO HAVE A HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION

[4] G.M. Breakwell and C. Fife-Shaw. "Sexual Activities and
Preferences in a United Kingdom Sample of 16 to 20-Year Olds." Archives
of Sexual Behavior, 1992:21, pages 271 to 293. Also see D. Forman
and C. Chilvers. "Sexual Behaviour of Young and Middle-Aged Men in
England and Wales." British Medical Journal, 298, 1989,
pages 1,137 to 1,142.

[7] Deborah Dawson. "AIDS Knowledge and Attitudes for
January-March, 1990, Provisional Data From the National Health Interview
Survey;" Joseph E. Fitti and Marcie Cynamon, op. cit. for
April-June, 1990; Pamela F. Adams and Ann M. Hardy, op. cit. for
July-September, 1990. All in Advance Data, numbers 193, 195, and
198, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control,
Public Health Service, United States Department of Health and Human
Services. Page 11 in all three documents.

[8] Study ending in June of 1992, performed by Alfred Spira of the
Bicetre Hospital of Paris. described in Peter Aldhous. "Sexual
Behavior: French Venture Where U.S. Fears to Tread." Science
Magazine, July 3, 1992, page 25.

[9] Results of a November 1992 election exit poll, described in
Murray Edelman. "The Gay Issues." The New York Times,
November 5, 1992, pages B8 and B9.

[11] From those studies that included both men and women only. For
all cases in which both men and women were studied, it is assumed that
the studies and surveys concentrated on a population that was split
evenly between men and women.

An exhaustive study of human sexuality performed by sociologist Tom
W. Smith of the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center
(NORC) showed that 93 percent of the American population has been
exclusively heterosexual since the age of 18. Five to six percent
considered themselves bisexual, and only one percent called themselves
"exclusively homosexual." The NORC study also showed that only
6.8 percent of the entire general population engages in "unsafe
sex," that is, sexual behavior that would put them at risk of
contracting AIDS.[9]

Even the Kinsey Institute finally released the comprehensive results
of its 1970 poll after 20 years and admitted that it found that less
than two percent of all males had participated in homosexual activity in
the last year.[10]

Kinsey Child-Molesting 'Research.'

Kinsey's research into
homosexuality was not the only area in which he was unethical. Some of
his 'research' was simultaneously pornographic and abusive of young
children.

For example, Kinsey's book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
(The Male Report) describes mechanically-induced orgasm in very
young children.

According to Table 31 of the Male Report, "Preadolescent
Experience in Orgasm," children as young as two months were
manipulated, and infants as young as 5 months achieved
"orgasm." Many of the younger children had to be masturbated
for more than ten minutes, according to Table 32, "Speed of
Preadolescent Orgasm." Table 34, "Examples of Multiple Orgasm
in Preadolescent Males," alleged that an 11-month old achieved 14
"orgasms" in 38 minutes, a 4-year old experienced 26
"orgasms" in 24 hours, and a 13-year old had three
"orgasms" in one minute.

Such intense physical stimulation appeared to be agonizing to the
youngest children, as evidenced by the description of their reactions
when being "manipulated;" "Extreme tension with violent
convulsion, often involving the sudden heaving and jerking of the whole
body ... gasping, eyes staring ... mouth distorted, sometimes with
tongue protruding ... whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching
... throbs or violent jerking of the penis ... masochistic reactions ...
more or less frenzied movements ... groaning, sobbing, or more violent
cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger
children) ... extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes
fainting of subject ... panicked or frightened ... will fight away from
the partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax ..."[4]

According to Pediatrician Lester H. Caplan, "These children had
to be held down or subject to strapping down, otherwise they would not
respond willingly."[6]

Wardell Pomeroy, in his book Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex
Research, describes one of the "qualified researchers" who
manipulated the children:

This man had had homosexual relations
with 600 preadolescent males, heterosexual relations with 200
preadolescent females, intercourse with countless adults of both sexes,
with animals of many species, and besides had employed elaborate
techniques of masturbation. Of thirty three family members, he had had
sexual contacts with seventeen. His grandmother introduced him to
heterosexual intercourse, and his first homosexual experience was with
his father.[7]

When syndicated columnist Patrick Buchanan read this material and
dared to publish charges against Kinsey, pro-abortion lawyer Harriet
Pilpel of the American Civil Liberties Union threatened him with legal
action.

The 'Right to Privacy' In the Schools.

Through the sheer force of
publicity and compelled uniformity, sex educators of Kinsey's time
declared him to be the scientific equivalent of Newton, Galileo, and
Einstein. They obviously made such absurd comparisons in order to
advance the various points of their agenda.

They knew full well that no true and rigorous scientific research
would support their views. Therefore, they had to create a
"star:" Alfred Kinsey.

Kinsey's preoccupation with privacy (described above) could only have
one logical purpose: That of self-protection. This ingrained obsession
with concealment naturally transfers to the public school system.

Homosexuality is uniformly presented as a higher good in
secular sex education programs. This is perhaps the primary reason the
school sex education experts will do anything to prevent parents from
seeing the materials that their children are exposed to.

For example, the paganistic Unitarian Universalist Association's sex
education program entitled About Your Sexuality depicts, among
other things, explicit scenes of anal intercourse which it labels
"harmless," and "only one possible variation of
sexuality," equal to all the others. There have been many instances
of parents being banned from even previewing these and like materials
because of a lack of "open-mindedness," "good
faith," or some other indefinable fault.

In summary, parental involvement in secular sex education programs is
encouraged only when the parents are deemed to be
"enlightened." This terms applies only to those parents
whose views coincide exactly with those of the sex educators and
school-based clinic pushers.

In the lofty opinion of the sexologists, of course, the vast majority
of parents are by no means "enlightened."

The American Psychiatric Association Coup.

Introduction.

Homosexuals commonly point to the fact that the
'medical community' and, more specifically, psychiatrists agree with
them that homosexuality is a "normal human sexual response."

It is certainly true that the American Psychiatric Association (APA)
removed homosexuality from its list of "mental disorders"
twenty years ago, in 1973. This is a fact that almost always comes up in
debates with sodomites.

What the homosexuals do not mention, of course, is that this sudden
change in attitude was not based on any new scientific evidence. As
described in the following paragraphs, it was a purely political move,
induced by a relentless saturation campaign of deception, intimidation,
and unethical collusion between the APA committee and activist sodomite
groups.

Preparing the Ground.

In 1968, representatives of activist homosexual
groups approached leading psychiatrists and the officers of psychiatric
organizations and began to lay the groundwork for the reclassification
of their perversions as normal manifestations of human sexuality.

These activists correctly recognized that such a move was absolutely
mandatory if they were to win public acceptance. After all, society in
general would not look very kindly upon the subsequent lobbying done by
a group whose members were officially recognized as "mentally
disordered."

In the three years during which the APA's Homosexuality Task Force
was deliberating, it collaborated actively with several sodomite groups,
including the Gay Activist's Alliance, the Mattachine Society, and the
Daughters of Bilitis, while completely ignoring organizations with views
that contrasted with the homosexuals'.

Abram Kardiner, former Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia
University, revealed that

A powerful lobby of "gay"
organizations has brought pressure on the American Psychiatric
Association to remove homosexuality from the category of aberrancy. This
is only one facet of the tidal wave of egalitarianism and divisiveness
that is sweeping the country ...[11]

During this unethical collusion, Kinsey colleague Paul Gebhard said
that anyone who was known to harbor the view that homosexuality was a
disorder was systematically excluded from being a member of the Task
Force or from even being able to present his views or evidence to it.

In other words, the sodomites packed this committee in the same
manner that pro-abortionists and fetal tissue harvesters do: Only those
people with the "correct" viewpoint were allowed to voice an
opinion.

But the homosexuals did not focus on the APA alone; they intimidated
psychiatrists all over the nation. While the APA Task Force was
preparing its report, any psychiatrist or psychoanalyst who dared
present documentation that homosexuality was a psychological disorder anywhere
in the country was shouted down and even physically attacked at
public forums or at local and national meetings of mental health
professionals.[11]

The APA Caves In.

The years of hard work put in by the sodomites
began to pay off in 1972. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Task Force on Homosexuality Final Report parroted Alfred Kinsey's
proclamation that "exclusive heterosexuality" and
"exclusive homosexuality" were "sexual extremes,"
and that most people were basically bisexual.[12]

This report in turn exerted a great deal of influence on the APA. In
order to make its final report appear to be scientific, the APA's
Homosexuality Task Force sent a letter to all APA member psychiatrists.
This letter did not ask whether or not homosexuality should or should
not be declared "normal." It was signed by all candidates for
the upcoming elections for the APA presidency and urged all members to vote
that homosexuality was thereafter declared to be on a level with normal
sexuality.

This view was so voted by a very slim margin. The letter did not, of
course, reveal the fact that it was written and funded by the
National Gay Task Force. One of the letter's signers, in fact, later
confessed that he knew that such knowledge would have been the
"kiss of death" for a pro-homosexual vote.[13]

Subsequently, the APA eliminated homosexuality as a mental disorder
from the 1973 edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.

APA member Dr. Henry W. Riecken cut to the heart of the APA's
motivation as he wrote a scathing dissent in the appendix to the
above-mentioned NIMH report entitled "Detailed Reservations
Regarding the Task Force Recommendations on Social Policy:"

It is as if they [the Task Force] said, "Here is a phenomenon
about which we know almost nothing and about which there is a great deal
of anxiety and concern; therefore, let us suggest a major revision in
public policy for dealing with this phenomenon." I cannot escape
the belief that this is an utterly unreasonable conclusion to draw from
the sea of ignorance and misinformation in which we find
ourselves.

The Essential Point.

The essential point to be made about this
chicanery is that the sudden complete reversal in the APA position on
homosexuality was not brought about as a result of a careful
regime of scholarly research and study; it was a blatantly political
move, a vote, of all things, on the status of a mental illness.
Furthermore, this vote was undertaken in a climate of deception and
intimidation.

At no time before or since has the APA or any other psychological or
psychiatric professional group ever addressed a mental health
question in this manner.

Behind the Scenes.

It is fascinating indeed to see what psychiatrists
really think about homosexuality when they are free of the
restraints of intimidation and political pressure.

Almost simultaneously with the 1972 National Institute of Mental
Health report, the New York County District Branch of the APA's Task
Force on Homosexuality produced a second report. According to APA member
Charles Socarides, M.D., the document concluded that "... exclusive
homosexuality was a disorder of psychosexual development, and
simultaneously asked for civil rights for those suffering from the
disorder."[11]

It is even more revealing to examine the results of polls of
psychiatrists taken since 1973 regarding the issue of homosexual
orientation.

The original "voting" letter distributed by the APA
Homosexuality Task Force in 1973 was answered by only about one-quarter
of the recipients, leading one to speculate that the "volunteer
bias" ignored by Kinsey in his original studies led to
pro-homosexual results. It is quite certain that, if all of the
APA members had returned their "ballots," homosexuality would
have remained a mental disorder in the view of the organization.

A later series of private surveys which could be answered
confidentially and without fear of retaliation showed that two-thirds of
APA member psychiatrists regarded homosexuality as abnormal despite the
parent organization's switch.[11]

More specifically, in 1977, four years after the APA 'switch,' the
journal Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality revealed that it had
polled 2,500 psychiatrists on their view of what "current thinking
on homosexuality" was, and, by a lopsided margin of 69% to 18%
(nearly four to one, with 13% undecided), the respondents answered that
"Homosexuality was usually a pathological adaptation as opposed to
a normal variation."[14]

This is certainly a more accurate poll than the original APA letter
because the letter was subject to all of the "volunteer bias"
that self-selected populations exhibit. However, by comparison, the 1977
survey was truly random, and so its results should certainly be given
more weight.

But will this letter ever be mentioned by the pro-homosexual media or
by sodomite activists themselves?

One effective tactic used by supporters of sexual perversions is the
emphasis on 'doctored' scientific studies that 'support' pre-ordained
(and invariably favorable) conclusions that in turn are used to lend
credibility and legitimacy to the perversions of interest.

There are many examples of this anti-scientific nonsense. Alfred
Kinsey used deception and outright lies to "show" that ten
percent of the population of the United States was homosexual. The North
American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) uses bizarre 'studies' and
'surveys' that purportedly support their position that sexual
intercourse should begin shortly after birth. And the abortion-pill
pushers produce heavily-flawed documentation of their position that
RU-486 is "a necessity for women's health."

Perhaps the most egregious and laughable attempts at producing
scientific support revolve around attempts to prove that homosexuality
is a genetic, not acquired, condition.

The two studies most widely quoted that supposedly support the idea
of homosexuality as an inborn condition are Simon LaVey's study of the
hypothalamus and J. Michael Bailey's study of the sexual orientations of
identical and fraternal twins.

These studies and their fatal flaws are described in the following
paragraphs.

The Brain Node Study.

Introduction.

Simon LaVey, a confessed sodomite, examined the brains
of 35 male cadavers (16 heterosexuals and 19 admitted homosexuals) to
see if he could find any differences between those of homosexuals and
those of normal people.[15] He found that the INAH3 cluster of brain
neurons was twice as large in normal men as it was in homosexuals.

Professional homosexual propagandists immediately seized upon this
bit of information and alleged that it "proved" that
homosexuality is an ingrained or genetic condition; i.e., that
homosexuals are "born that way."

Problems With LaVey's Study. However, there were several very obvious
difficulties with LaVey's study that the propagandists glossed over or
ignored completely.

(1) LaVey did not verify that his 16 "non-homosexual"
subjects were, in fact, heterosexual. This is significant in light of
the fact that six of these 16 men (37.5%) died of AIDS. LaVey
acknowledged in his article that this was "a distinct shortcoming
of my study."

(2) Three of the "heterosexual" brains had smaller node
clusters than the average of the "homosexual" ones, and three
of the "homosexual" brains had larger node clusters
than the average of the "heterosexual" ones.

(3) LaVey's sample population size was ridiculously small. What he
would like us to believe is that an examination of 35 cadavers somehow
"proves" that the sexual orientation of billions of human
beings is inbred or genetic. The best that LaVey could rationally claim
is a percentage probability that his study reached the correct
conclusion not what he actually did, i.e., that his study had a
100 percent chance of reaching a correct conclusion.

(4) LaVey's logic is obviously flawed because the brain node in
question has not been proven as being either a cause or an effect
of homosexuality. In other words, the brain node might be smaller because
of homosexual activity instead of causing it.

A Comparative Situation.

Perhaps the most serious difficulty of
LaVey's study is related to his painfully obvious conflict of interest.

This study can best be debunked by comparing it to a situation in
which a pathologist hired by the American Tobacco Institute performs
autopsies on 35 men. Sixteen of these men had never touched tobacco in
any form. The other 19 began smoking at a very young age and smoked two
packs a day until the day they died.

The pathologist removes and examines the lungs of the 35 men. He
finds that the lungs of the nonsmokers are generally pink and healthy
and the lungs of the smokers are obviously discolored and badly fouled
by tar deposits.

Based upon the researcher's data, the American Tobacco Institute
announces that some babies are born with badly damaged and tarry lungs
and that this trait causes them to become smokers. Conversely, those
babies that are born with pink and healthy lungs will not become
smokers.

This line of reasoning makes no sense at all, of course, but the
media accepted the identical logic of the homosexuals in LaVey's study
without question.

The 'Twins' Study.

Introduction.

Dr. J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and
Dr. Richard Pillard of Boston University School of Medicine found that,
if one male twin is homosexual, identical twins are three times more
likely to be homosexual than fraternal twins.[16]

In sets of identical twins where one brother was homosexual,
there was a 52 percent chance that the other twin was homosexual as
well. This number was 22 percent for fraternal (non-identical) twins and
only 9 percent for non-twin brothers.

The conclusion that the authors drew from these comparisons was this:
The incidence of homosexuality became higher as the genetic link between
brothers became closer. Therefore, homosexuality must have a genetic
basis.

Yep, More Problems ...

As with LaVey's research, there were very
serious shortcomings in the methodology of this study.

Incredibly, the advertising for volunteers for the study was done in
a homosexual magazine. Therefore, it can be expected that the
incidence of homosexuality among all respondents would be exceedingly
high. After all, normal people don't often read sex-saturated homosexual
literature.

Secondly, the fact that 48 percent of the identical twins of
homosexual brothers were not homosexuals themselves indicates
that homosexuality is the result of environmental influences. Dr. Bailey
himself acknowledged that "There must be something in the
environment to yield the discordant twins."[17]

Finally, previous research had shown an extremely strong correlation
between incest and resultant homosexuality, but the authors dismissed
the effects of incest as "insignificant."[18]

Brown University developmental biologist Anne Fausto put her finger
on the study's fatal flaw, which was its failure to separate
environmental from genetic influences. She said that "In order for
such a study to be at all meaningful, you'd have to look at twins raised
apart. It's such badly interpreted genetics."[17]

Has the Propaganda Been Effective?

Christian activists must recognize that the purpose of the above
studies was not to convert the hearts and minds of the people. Average
Americans have a good dose of common sense and instinctively realize
that homosexuality and all of its entrained evils are unhealthy for both
individuals and societies in general.

The purpose of these studies was to convince the power structure (in
particular, the court system) that homosexuality is an innate
characteristic.

After all, the court system is all that the sodomites need in order
to fulfill their many goals. The court system was used to enshrine
abortion in this country over the objections of most of the population,
just as the euthanasiasts are using it now.

It is very important indeed to note that a decade of intense
pro-homosexual propagandizing by the media has done nothing more than
harden public opinion against homosexuality, as shown below.

RESULTS OF GALLUP POLL ON PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF HOMOSEXUALITY

QUESTION: "Should homosexuality be considered an acceptable
alternative lifestyle?"

These polls show that the intended effect of a full decade of
homosexual and media propaganda to 'favorably' change public opinion
towards sodomites has not achieved its purpose. While more people have
an opinion on sodomites (only one-third as many people are now
"undecided" than a decade ago), the margin of unfavorable over
favorable replies has increased from 17% to 19%.

The Actual Percentage of Homosexuals in the General Population.

The notion that 10% of men are gay born in the studies of
Alfred Kinsey and popularized by activists is dying under the weight of
new studies.

Kim Painter. "Only 1% of Men Say They Are Gay." USA
Today, April 15, 1993, pages 1A and 8D.

Figure 116-1 summarizes the results of the eight major studies that
have been performed on homosexual orientation all over the world in the
last five years. The percentages of those persons who claim a homosexual
orientation are remarkably consistent from study to study.

Even more significantly, the cumulative results of these studies show
that 3.7 percent of men and 3.2 percent of women have ever had a
homosexual experience even if it was only one such experience. In
other words, these tiny numbers include even that large number of people
who "try out" perverted sex just once and, due to revulsion
and/or shame, never try it again.

The percentage of 'lifetime' or 'exclusive' homosexuality would of
course be much lower, and this fact is borne out by the studies as well.
For example, the most recent study, completed by Alfred Spira of the
Bicetre Hospital of Paris in June 1992, showed that only 1.1 percent of
men and 0.3 percent of women had had a homosexual experience in the last
twelve months.[19]

Since the average percentage of homosexuality among both genders
would thus be about 0.7 percent, the "ten percent" myth
exaggerates the true incidence of homosexuality by a factor of about
fourteen.

What Homosexuals Think About Their Condition.

Introduction.

It is all well and good to debate about scientific
studies and scholarly opinions, but nothing is more revealing than to
find out what homosexuals really think about themselves. Only in
the homosexual mind is the truth about 'homosexual orientation' known.

The homosexual activist has two faces; one is for 'straight'
consumption, and the other, which is remarkably truthful, finds its
expression in the homosexual media and in certain radical segments of
the scientific community.

It is important to be able to separate propaganda (the line that is
fed to the outside world) from what the homosexuals really
believe. Nowhere is the dichotomy between the two greater than in
matters relating to 'sexual orientation.'

Not Really 'Born That Way' After All.

Perhaps the most damaging
evidence against the "born that way" theory is provided by the
homosexuals themselves.

Homosexuals themselves generally don't believe that their
orientation is genetic or inborn. Sexologist Alfred Kinsey (the
originator of the "ten percent" myth) conducted a survey of
979 homosexuals in 1970, before the "gay rights" movement had
gathered momentum. He found that less than ten percent of all his
respondents believed that they were "born that way." More than
80 percent attributed their "sexual orientation" to childhood
trauma or other environmental influences.

Even if society were to grant that homosexuals have
no control over their sexuality, the sodomites would not be satisfied.
They have gone one step further and now assert that it is impossible
to turn away from homosexuality. They even vigorously resist any
attempts to prove otherwise by censoring media presentations of
"reformed" or "reforming" homosexuals and by
attacking any institution that assists anyone in turning away from their
homosexual perversions.

Homosexual literature and pornographic fiction are replete with the
strange theme of heterosexuals who, when seduced by sodomites, suddenly
"convert" into homosexuals. It is therefore reasonable to
assume that homosexuals can be "reconverted" back to normalcy.
However, the sodomites do not buy this logical argument; they insist
that changes in "sexual orientation" can only be one way; a
kind of perverted check valve, if you will.

Several studies have confirmed that many or most homosexuals can
overcome their lust for other men. In one of these, Bieber and Bieber
concluded in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (24(1979)
409-421) that 30 to 50 percent of homosexuals can actually overcome
their sexual orientation to a certain extent, and the remainder can be
helped to achieve greater self-control and higher self-esteem.[20]

Many homosexuals not only change their behavior, they change their orientation
to the point where they become disgusted with their previous
activities.[21] If homosexuality were innate, this would not be
possible. It is now recognized that alcoholism is probably genetic and
that there is no such thing as a fully-recovered alcoholic: The urge to
drink will always be there, even if it is latent. Recovered homosexuals,
by contrast, usually have no desire whatever to re-enter the perverted
lifestyle they left behind.

It is obvious that homosexuals realize that this fact is a great
threat to their "ten percent" myth; this is why they
vigorously attack any research or statement that shows that homosexuals
can be turned into normal people.

The critical point to remember is this: If homosexuality is genetic
or innate, then environmental influences would not greatly affect the
incidence of this characteristic.

However, environmental influences do have a profound impact on
the number of people who become sexual perverts. The most effective of
these influences, of course, is religion: Those persons raised in
households without religious values are 450% more likely to become
homosexual than those raised in homes where religion is important.[22]

Homosexuals engage in a wide range of perversions, including sodomy,
fisting, rimming, pederasty, transvestitism, necrophilia, and sado-masochism.
It is ridiculous to assert that all of these behaviors are innate. In
fact, if homosexuality was an innate characteristic caused by a
particular gene, then homosexuals would more likely participate in a
narrower, more uniform range of deviations.

The Experts Speak on Homosexual Orientation.

Relief From Responsibility.

If the public accepts the homosexual
assertion that their 'orientation' was passed on to them by their
parents, then their sexual perversions will lose all of their moral
implications. Homosexuality will become absolutely neutral in content,
like a person's gender, left-handedness, or skin color.

This would naturally relieve homosexuals of any responsibility for
their actions. If they contract gonorrhea of the mouth, it's not their
fault. If they get AIDS, it's not their fault, they can just yell for
the government to come to their rescue. If health authorities close a
"gay bathhouse," the sodomites can claim that they have
violated the Constitutional rights of homosexuals (and of all
people) everywhere.

The Objectives of the Movement.

Chapter 117 describes in detail the
actual stated objectives of the homosexual movement.

Believe it or not, these objectives include;[23]

 the closing of all churches that oppose them;
 the total destruction of the family;
 exile and actual murder of those who oppose them in any way;
 the "conversion" by forced sodomy of all young men to
homosexuality;
 the official condemnation of normal love between men and women,
and
 the raising of private armies of thugs to enforce their agenda.

If anyone opposes this hateful agenda, the homosexuals just snivel
that their civil rights are being violated, and demand that the
"homophobic bigots" responsible for their
"oppression" be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law
and forcibly indoctrinated in "sensitivity sessions."

Opinions of the Experts.

Unfortunately for the sodomites, they cannot
be relieved of responsibility for their actions under this argument,
because it is a lie. The world's leading experts on human sexuality
agree that homosexuality is an acquired orientation, not a
hereditary orientation.

Some quotes by these experts are listed in Figure 116-2.

FIGURE 116-2
THE EXPERTS SPEAK ON THE SOURCE OF HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION

The genetic theory of homosexuality has been generally
discarded today. Despite the interest in possible hormone mechanisms in
the origin of homosexuality, no serious scientist today suggests that a
simple cause-effect relationship applies.

No one has ever found a single replicable genetic hormonal or
chemical difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Dr. Judd Marmor, head of the American Psychological Association. Homosexual
Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal. New York: Basic Books, 1982.

There is little evidence of the existence of such a thing as
innate perversity. There is an abundance of evidence that most human
sexual activities would become comprehensible to most individuals if
they could know the background of each individual's behavior. I have
myself come to the conclusion that homosexuality is largely a matter of
conditioning.

William Masters and Virginia Johnson, interview with United Press
International, April 23, 1979.

The only thing most experts agree on is that homosexuality is
not a result of any kinky genes.

Time Magazine editorial, October 31, 1969, page 64.

With rare exceptions, homosexuality is neither genetic nor the
result of some glandular disturbance. Homosexuals are made, not
"born that way." From my 25 years' experience as a clinical
psychologist, I firmly believe that homosexuality is a learned response
to early experiences and that it can be unlearned.

Dr. R. Kronemeyer, in an interview with the New York Tribune,
May 6, 1983.

Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the same sex for
orgiastic satisfaction, is not innate. Such an object choice is learned,
acquired behavior; there is no inevitable genetically inborn propensity
toward the choice of a partner of either the same or opposite sex ...
Establishing the psychosexual institution of homosexuality alongside the
sexual institution of heterosexuality could well produce a massive
social disruption without parallel in medical and social history.

Dr. C.W. Socarides, professor of psychiatry, State University of New
York, International Journal of Psychiatry, December 1972.

We may tentatively conclude that the main source for gender and
sexual behavior deviance is found in social learning and psychological
development variables.

Dr. G.A. Rekers, North American Social Science Network,
Arlington, Virginia, February 27, 1987.

Whatever may be the possible unlearned assistance from
constitutional sources, the child's psychosexual identity is not
written, unlearned, in the genetic code, the hormonal system, or the
nervous system at birth.

In 1981 we drew back and became more sexually conservative
because of fear of the AIDS epidemic. Now we have decided that certain
death is preferable to dull sex lives.

A homosexual radio spokesperson.[24]

A Sexual Addiction.

Promiscuous homosexuals display every one
of the classic attributes of substance addiction.

In reality, they are physically addicted to perverted sex. Dr. Gerard
van der Aardwag struck to the heart of this matter when he stated that
"[The] homosexual's erotic drives consume much of their thinking,
more so than in heterosexuals. Homosexual impulses really have something
compulsive about them, in that they resemble other neurotic disturbances
such as phobias, obsessional worries, and obsessive-compulsive neuroses.
They make the sufferer restless. The driving force of this
compulsiveness is the inferiority complaint. This makes the longing
insatiable, because the same complaint will always recur."[25]

If this "addiction theory" seems like a novel concept,
consider the classic signs of substance addiction as applied to active
homosexuals. These indications, listed in Figure 116-3, precisely
fit the promiscuous homosexual deathstyle.

FIGURE 116-3
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOMOSEXUAL ADDICTION

(1) Reoriented Priorities. The homosexual addict's life centers
around his 'habit.' His job, his wife and family (if any), and his
possessions mean nothing. All that matters is that he be guaranteed a
steady supply of mostly-anonymous 'partners' in sodomy. For information
on the incredible degree of homosexual sexual promiscuity, see Chapter
119, "Homosexual Practices."

(2) Obsessiveness. The homosexual addict is obsessive. He constantly
craves sodomy and other perverted sex acts. In fact, these thoughts
occupy most of his thoughts; all that matters is the next sexual
encounter.

(3) Compulsiveness. The homosexual addict is compulsive. He is
completely out of control in many instances. He may make occasional
half-hearted attempts at limiting or controlling his behavior, but such
attempts generally fail.

(4) Reclusiveness. The homosexual addict withdraws from his former
(normal) activities and friends. The homosexual lifestyle is so
extraordinarily perverse that it is incomprehensible to the mainstream
public. So he 'hangs out' with his new 'friends,' because they
'understand' him and help him get more and more deeply into the
homosexual deathstyle.

(6) Withdrawal. The homosexual addict experiences withdrawal symptoms
to varying degrees if he is placed in an environment where sodomy and
other perverted sexual acts are considered unacceptable or are
unavailable.

(7) Escapism. The homosexual addict is an escapist. He avoids
responsibility for his actions and blames everyone else for anything in
his life that is not to his liking. This aspect of homosexual addiction
has assumed extreme proportions in the so-called 'gay rights' movement.

(8) Privacy Obsession. The homosexual addict is extremely concerned
about privacy. Hence names like "The Right to Privacy PAC" and
"The Privacy Newsletter." He knows that privacy is essential
to continuing his socially unacceptable behavior.

(9) Cross-Addiction. Finally, the homosexual addict is usually
cross-addicted. This means that he does not limit himself to the
"standard" perversions, but becomes involved in pedophilia,
transvestitism, sado-masochism (S&M), bestiality, hard-core
pornography, and other horrors. He is very frequently alcoholic and/or
addicted to various illegal drugs, as well.

The Evidence is in the Ads.

Another indication that homosexuals are
true addicts is provided by The Advocate Magazine (originally The
Advocate: Newspaper of America's Homophile Community).

This stylish weekly bills itself as "The National Gay and
Lesbian Magazine" and is configured to appeal to 'mainline' (i.e.,
most non-activist) homosexuals. Therefore, it accurately represents the
opinions and desires of most homosexuals.

The addictive aspect of the homosexual orientation is revealed in the
massive pull-out classified ad section of the magazine. An analysis of
the photo and written ads in The Advocate Magazine by The
Institute for Media Education revealed that 100 percent dealt
with sexual matters. 15 percent advertised torture and brutality; five
percent had a strongly Nazi theme; and 11 percent implied a desire for
adult/child sex.[26]

Homosexuals often play on the sympathy of 'straights' by asserting
that they are capable of long-term monogamous relationships, but all of
the available evidence points to sodomites caring only about their sex
lives with as many people as possible.

The Institute for Media Education found that only one percent of the
sex ads in The Advocate revealed a desire for a 'permanent' or
'loving' relationship. As far as homosexual 'marriages' go, they average
30 months in duration, and more than half of the 'partners' cheat even
during this short time interval[27]

Escaping the Deathstyle.

There has never been a single documented case of change in
sexual orientation.

A. Damien Martin of the Institute for the Protection of Lesbian and
Gay Youth.[28]

A Big Secret Indeed.

Homosexual propagandists in the "gay
rights" movement have a very important secret.

Homosexuals can leave their lifestyle.

Why is this important?

Because, if it can be shown that homosexuals can be 'converted' to
heterosexuality, then the theory that 'gays' are 'born that way' is
effectively refuted.

And if the 'born that way' allegation is debunked, the homosexuals
lose their claim to being a protected minority under civil rights laws.

What the Homosexuals Say.

The most truthful indicators of whether or
not the 'gay' lifestyle can be given up are naturally provided by the
homosexuals themselves and those who study them carefully. It is
interesting to hear their opinions on this subject.

 61 percent of homosexuals agree that they could be 'converted' to
exclusive heterosexuality and 58% agreed that "People are
homosexual only if they want to be."[29]

 Masters and Johnson (the famous husband and wife 'sexologist'
team) reported that 79.1 percent of their clients who attempted to
discontinue homosexual behavior were successful immediately, and 71.6
percent remained successful after an elapsed period of five years.[30]

 About a quarter of all homosexuals believe that their condition
is a disorder and 37% believe that they themselves are
"psychologically disturbed" because of their sexual
orientation.[31]

 When asked the question "If a teenager who was just starting
[homosexual activities] came to you and asked your advice, what would
you tell them?," 80 percent of all homosexuals recommended
cessation over continuation.[32]

Help in Escaping.

Just as those addicted to drugs or alcohol can free
themselves from slavery, so too can promiscuous homosexuals. They may or
may not always suffer from their cravings, but they can learn to control
themselves and reintegrate themselves into society.

For information on how one can turn away from homosexuality, contact
one of the following organizations.

[2] Female participant in the April 1989 "March for Death"
in Washington, D.C. Quoted in Voices for the Unborn
[Feasterville, Pennsylvania], October 1991, page 4.

[3] Sigmund Freud, "The Sexual Life of Man." Quoted in The
Major Works of Sigmund Freud: A General Introduction to Psycho-Analysis.
Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, London, and Toronto. Lecture 20,
page 575.

[9] "Americans More Traditional On Sex Than Portrayed."
Focus On the Family Citizen, April 1990, page 5.

[10] Science Magazine, January 20, 1989, page 13.

[11] Charles Socarides, M.D. "The Sexual Deviations and the
Diagnostic Manual." American Journal of Psychotherapy, July
1978. Also see Arno Karlen. "Homosexuality: The Scene and Its
Students." The Sociology of Sex. James Henson and Edward
Sagarin (editors). New York: Schocken Publishers, 1978.

[12] John M. Livergood, M.D. (Editor). National Institute of
Mental Health Task Force on Homosexuality: Final Report and Background
Papers. United States Government Printing Office, 1972, page 2
(Introduction).

[22] "What Causes Homosexuality and Can it Be Cured?"
Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sex, 1984

[23] Essay by Michael Swift in the Gay Community News.
Reprinted in the February 15-21, 1987 Congressional Record.

[24] David A. Noebel, Wayne C. Lutton, and Paul Cameron. AIDS:
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Summit Ministries Research
Center, Manitou Springs, Colorado, 80829. 1985, 149 pages. Reviewed by
Chilton Williamson, Jr. on page 58 of the April 11, 1986 issue of National
Review. A review of the literature that has been written about AIDS,
and an examination of the tactics used by homosexuals to take advantage
of the plague to further their own goals.

[28] A. Damien Martin, Institute for the Protection of Lesbian and
Gay Youth, quoted in Warren Bird. "New York Tax Dollars Fund a High
School for Homosexuals." Christianity Today, August 9, 1985,
page 37.

Ronald Bayer. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics
of Diagnosis. New York: Basic Books, 1981. This author defies the
strong politically correct wind from the American Psychiatric
Association and tells, among other things, how sodomites have used
certain medical societies to defraud the public and further their own
ends.

A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg. Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity
Among Men and Women. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.

A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith. Sexual Preference:
Statistical Appendix. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University
Press, 1981. Some of the author's results were tabulated from a 550-item
questionnaire answered by 4,340 adults from Los Angeles, Denver, Omaha,
Louisville, Dallas, and Washington, DC in 1983 and 1984. This survey was
conducted by the Institute for the Scientific Investigation of
Sexuality.

Greenhaven Press. Human Sexuality: Opposing Viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office Box 289009, San
Diego, California 92128-9009. 1989, 440 pages. This series consists of a
basic volume followed by annual updates by the same name. The main
arguments for and against each idea are written by the leading activists
in each field. Topics covered include contraceptives (the birth control
pill and condoms are emphasized), AIDS, homosexuality, and abortion.
This topic is covered by a series of books, beginning with a basic set
of essays entitled Sources and continuing with an additional and
updated annual series of essays. A catalog is available from the above
address and can be obtained by calling 1-(800) 231-5163.

Dick Hafer. Homosexuality: Legitimate, Alternate Deathstyle.
204 pages. The "comics commando" strikes again with a
comic-book style book on the various aspects of homosexuality:
Homosexual practices, including pedophilia; AIDS; the "gay
agenda;" and facts about homosexual orientation. This book is not
only easy to read because of its format, but also full of
well-documented and footnoted information.

Father John F. Harvey. The Homosexual Person: New Thinking in
Pastoral Care. This book shows Catholic priests how to counsel
homosexuals from an orthodox position to lead chaste lives. Father
Harvey is the founder of Courage, the Catholic group for those
homosexuals trying to lead chaste and Christian lives. The author
discusses the theories on the origin of homosexuality, the possibility
of change in sexual orientation, and the pastoral perspectives and
programs offered to them.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual
Persons. 26 pages, 50 cents. Order from Ignatius Press, 15 Oakland
Avenue, Harrison, New York 10528. This brief document outlines the
Catholic Church's position that homosexuality is an "intrinsically
disordered condition," and discusses the special pastoral concern
that should be directed towards homosexuals.

Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichel. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The
Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House
Publishers, 1990. 237 pages. An excellent and detailed examination of
the background of the Alfred Kinsey sexual studies that
"showed" that children are sexual from birth and that ten
percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. This book examines
in detail the flaws in Kinsey's studies, and looks at the machinations
of modern-day 'sexologists' who build their work on his studies. Reisman
also details the impacts that Kinsey-style sex education has had on our
country.

United States Government, National Institute of Mental Health Task
Force on Homosexuality. Final Report and Background Papers. John
M. Livergood, M.D. (editor). United States Government Printing Office,
1972.

Gerard Van den Aardweg. Homosexuality and Hope: A Psychologist
Talks About Treatment and Change. Servant Books, Post Office Box
8617, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48107. 134 pages, 1986. Reviewed by Joseph
Sobran on pages 53 and 54 of the October 10, 1986 issue of National
Review>. Dr. Van den Aardweg holds that homosexuality is indeed a
psychological disorder, and a curable one. He states that it is rooted
in feelings of inferiority and is basically different from lesbianism in
some respects but similar to various expressions of arrested
heterosexual development. In all, a fascinating book on relevant theory.